Water charges for excessive usage

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

Very difficult to see the point of any of this TBH.

The original purpose of IW, at least the main purpose, was to set up a utility that could raise half it's funds from non-Government sources (i.e. charges). This would have enabled it to pass the Eurostat test and borrow the billions needed to fix the infrastructure, off the State's balance sheet.

Instead the whole thing was politically mis-managed and the lunatic-left allowed to destroy the whole enterprise.

Without the ability to borrow, IW is next to useless. The billions required cannot be raised through taxation and cannot be borrowed by the State. We will continue to apply a sticking plaster when major surgery is required. The Government will continue to kick the can down the road for the next generation to sort out for us - we can add it to the list of things we didn't have the balls to sort out for ourselves such as pensions and climate change - we will be rightly despised for our selfishness and narrow self-interest by our grandchildren.



In the long run, this will cost 10's of billions extra to sort out. Meanwhile the likes of Paul Murphy and the cowards in Government will retire on a king's ransom of a pension paid for by the people who's best interest they are supposed to be protecting - what a joke.

This is a mistake people make. They'll continue to support one party, that actually has power, while blaming incidental less than one percent politicians on any poorly planned moves by the governing party.
The sweet metering deal, crony appointments and arseways administration of IW is what doomed IW. Not to mention the anti-Irish public rhetoric from Fine Gael and Labour. They soon found it wasn't smart to ridicule every day folk out protesting so they honed in on Murphy and the like.
IW was mostly about 'looking after our own'. Any talk of environment was smoke and mirrors.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This is a mistake people make. They'll continue to support one party, that actually has power, while blaming incidental less than one percent politicians on any poorly planned moves by the governing party.
The sweet metering deal, crony appointments and arseways administration of IW is what doomed IW. Not to mention the anti-Irish public rhetoric from Fine Gael and Labour. They soon found it wasn't smart to ridicule every day folk out protesting so they honed in on Murphy and the like.
IW was mostly about 'looking after our own'. Any talk of environment was smoke and mirrors.

It’s no mistake Matt, and unfortunately no amount of rhetoric will change the fact that the warter(sic) charges were scuppered because a certain coterie were scared s*itless that they would end up ‘on the books’ and a light would be shone on their activities and claims.

That’s the plain reason Matt, and the generations coming after us will pay the price of those actions.

Red herrings about “looking after our own” and the rest are just a pure smokescreen to deflect from the real problem.....they wanted to stay ‘under the radar’ and tip around doing this and that paying for nothing and claiming everything.

Go figure.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

It’s no mistake Matt, and unfortunately no amount of rhetoric will change the fact that the warter(sic) charges were scuppered because a certain coterie were scared s*itless that they would end up ‘on the books’ and a light would be shone on their activities and claims.

That’s the plain reason Matt, and the generations coming after us will pay the price of those actions.

Red herrings about “looking after our own” and the rest are just a pure smokescreen to deflect from the real problem.....they wanted to stay ‘under the radar’ and tip around doing this and that paying for nothing and claiming everything.

Go figure.

There is a mistake Bren. We'd every day folk protesting.
Even if people believed Paul Murphy made FG quit metering, what does that say about Fine Gael? A nobody politician with a megaphone changes national policy?
No red herring in the still under investigation sitserv deal. No red herring in 'there's nothing wrong in looking after your own'. That's a direct quote Bren. The crony driver appointed to the IW board, no red herring there Bren lad. You're just pretending you don't know this stuff already and trying to use an already spent docket as currency, well middle Ireland didn't buy it then and it won't buy it now lad.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

There is a mistake Bren. We'd every day folk protesting.
Even if people believed Paul Murphy made FG quit metering, what does that say about Fine Gael? A nobody politician with a megaphone changes national policy?
No red herring in the still under investigation sitserv deal. No red herring in 'there's nothing wrong in looking after your own'. That's a direct quote Bren. The crony driver appointed to the IW board, no red herring there Bren lad. You're just pretending you don't know this stuff already and trying to use an already spent docket as currency, well middle Ireland didn't buy it then and it won't buy it now lad.

Some good points there Matthew, however the “everyday folk” were no doubt folk who saw let’s say’ a gap in the market’ We’ll ride this wave and see where it takes us dudes’

Lookit what happened here was Jockser suddenly realised he’d have to actually pay for something and while before the lad wouldn’t leave the crib before opening time, he was now prepared to rise a 0600hrs to protect his manor.

You are perfectly correct in your assertion that Middle Ireland won’t buy into it now and unless Jockser is pulled into the net and made stump up, this is a beaten docket.

The folk who get up early won’t be conned twice...... make no mistake about thaaaaaat.
“

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Some good points there Matthew, however the “everyday folk” were no doubt folk who saw let’s say’ a gap in the market’ We’ll ride this wave and see where it takes us dudes’

Lookit what happened here was Jockser suddenly realised he’d have to actually pay for something and while before the lad wouldn’t leave the crib before opening time, he was now prepared to rise a 0600hrs to protect his manor.

You are perfectly correct in your assertion that Middle Ireland won’t buy into it now and unless Jockser is pulled into the net and made stump up, this is a beaten docket.

The folk who get up early won’t be conned twice...... make no mistake about thaaaaaat.
“

Everyday folk means non-party aligned tax payers Bren.

If jockser is on the dole he still wasn't going to be paying for anything.

Folk that get up early need look at FF/FG Bren.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Everyday folk means non-party aligned tax payers Bren.

If jockser is on the dole he still wasn't going to be paying for anything.

Folk that get up early need look at FF/FG Bren.

Bit cryptic there Matthew, could you flesh that out a bit.


Now Jockser being on the dole is a different kettle of fish, if you don’t mind me saying.

You see, Jockser is a clever lad,Matthew, likes to, as we say in certain circles, operate around the edges.

Jockser likes to operate on the cash in hand stuff, y’know, this and that, can be be very skilled lads in fairness, but have twigged that to be’ on the books’ and paying the proper taxes can be somewhat ..... what’s the word....hmm. ..fettering.

Better to gunter around and hey, a bit here a bit there, y’ know yourself, claim everything.

Don’t want those pesky water meters about, don’t want the feds sniffing around, we are good the way we are.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Bit cryptic there Matthew, could you flesh that out a bit.


Now Jockser being on the dole is a different kettle of fish, if you don’t mind me saying.

You see, Jockser is a clever lad,Matthew, likes to, as we say in certain circles, operate around the edges.

Jockser likes to operate on the cash in hand stuff, y’know, this and that, can be be very skilled lads in fairness, but have twigged that to be’ on the books’ and paying the proper taxes can be somewhat ..... what’s the word....hmm. ..fettering.

Better to gunter around and hey, a bit here a bit there, y’ know yourself, claim everything.

Don’t want those pesky water meters about, don’t want the feds sniffing around, we are good the way we are.

Indeed I can. Anyone with issues about their lot need look to the government makes the policies not some bogeyman on less than 1% in the polls.

Anyone on low/no income was never going to have to pay, so why would they bother getting involved at all? Make sense lad.
Is 'jockser' code for Maria Bailey, Alan Farrell, Michael Noonan, Denis Naughten?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Indeed I can. Anyone with issues about their lot need look to the government makes the policies not some bogeyman on less than 1% in the polls.

Anyone on low/no income was never going to have to pay, so why would they bother getting involved at all? Make sense lad.
Is 'jockser' code for Maria Bailey, Alan Farrell, Michael Noonan, Denis Naughten?

Hmm ..so as I understand it anyone who has issues blame the Gubbermint.

Nice one.

Of course anyone with low/no income won’t have to pay..... what the fuhherke about the gunterrer..... clipping along.... this and that..odds and ends....cash in hand dudes..... Jaysus..... are you living in sheltered accommodations Matthew.

:eek:

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Hmm ..so as I understand it anyone who has issues blame the Gubbermint.

Nice one.

Of course anyone with low/no income won’t have to pay..... what the fuhherke about the gunterrer..... clipping along.... this and that..odds and ends....cash in hand dudes..... Jaysus..... are you living in sheltered accommodations Matthew.

:eek:

Do you call Paul Murphy by megaphone if you've issue with taxation or the children's hospital over run? Do you get much satisfaction from that?

You are speaking in tongues Bren.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you call Paul Murphy by megaphone if you've issue with taxation or the children's hospital over run? Do you get much satisfaction from that?

You are speaking in tongues Bren.

Matthew, cannot make Head nor Tail of that post.

Apologies amigo.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Matthew, cannot make Head nor Tail of that post.

Apologies amigo.

Not surprised based on your views in regards of this issue.
If you've issues who do you blame? Paul Murphy or 'Gubbermint'?

McMurphy

Jockser is back from Stuttgart I assume?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Not surprised based on your views in regards of this issue.
If you've issues who do you blame? Paul Murphy or 'Gubbermint'?

Neither came out of the campaign with much kudos, Matthew.

I deal in facts, I believe in broadening the taxbase so our country is not too exposed to highs and lows.

I believe that EVERYONE should contribute ,however small.

I believe that welfare is for those who really need it, not for those who choose to ride that horse cradle to grave.

I believe that anyone who abuses power should be tried and appropriately dealt with in accordance with the law

I believe the faceless kernts in the State bodies should be accountable and made account for poor performance.


Whatever that makes me , that’s what I am .

atticu

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Anyone on low/no income was never going to have to pay, so why would they bother getting involved at all?

The reason why they got involved was because they were going to have to hand back some of the free money they get, to pay for a resource they use.

Don’t ever think, believe or try and convince anyone otherwise.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Neither came out of the campaign with much kudos, Matthew.

I deal in facts, I believe in broadening the taxbase so our country is not too exposed to highs and lows.

I believe that EVERYONE should contribute ,however small.

I believe that welfare is for those who really need it, not for those who choose to ride that horse cradle to grave.

I believe that anyone who abuses power should be tried and appropriately dealt with in accordance with the law

I believe the faceless kernts in the State bodies should be accountable and made account for poor performance.


Whatever that makes me , that’s what I am .

Sorry Bren, you missed my question twice now after I was nice enough to spell it out. We'll have a final go sure; if you have an issue related to government policies, taxation etc, would you complain to 'Gubbermint' or someone like Paul Murphy?

James Brown

atticu wrote: »

The reason why they got involved was because they were going to have to hand back some of the free money they get, to pay for a resource they use.

Don’t ever think, believe or try and convince anyone otherwise.

No they were going to get an allowance. They were not going to lose any money. The tax payer was footing the bill. Did you not know this? It's common knowledge.

If you believe the only IW protesters were the minuscule minority who are able to carry out welfare fraud on an annual basis, (if they exist at all) you'd be wrong based on sheer numbers alone. Also, 'I'm not available for work. Hope the dole don't see me marching' really? Get up the yard.

Maybe Leo should have concentrated on people who like to get up early in the morning to protest.

atticu

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No they were going to get an allowance. They were not going to lose any money. The tax payer was footing the bill. Did you not know this? It's common knowledge.

If you believe the only IW protesters were the minuscule minority who are able to carry out welfare fraud on an annual basis, (if they exist at all) you'd be wrong based on sheer numbers alone. Also, 'I'm not available for work. Hope the dole don't see me marching' really? Get up the yard.

Maybe Leo should have concentrated on people who like to get up early in the morning to protest.

You have chosen to believe something.
I am not going to even try and change your belief.

Benedict

From Day 1 when Big Phil warned the Irish people to pay up or they'd know about it, the whole thing has been an almighty mess.

Entire estates refused to allow the installation of meters and eventually, IW abandoned installations completely.
They don't even bother installing them now in new builds. They've decided that those who accepted installation will now have to cover the bill for the entire 100% of the IW customers and because they didn't put up a fight about the installations, they probably won't put up a fight about being stiffed with the entire bill either.

It's a bit like half the customers in a restaurant refusing to pay so the owner says "OK folks. Those who are willing to pay will now be paying for their own meals plus the meals of those refusing to pay".

And I suppose the people who were willing to pay for their own will now have no problem paying for the others also????

And pigs might fly.

Sorry lads, if it's the rule for one, it has to be the rule for all - or forget it.

James Brown

atticu wrote: »

You have chosen to believe something.
I am not going to even try and change your belief.

You said...

Don’t ever think, believe or try and convince anyone otherwise.

If you genuinely think all the Irish water protesters, or the majority, were lifers on the dole, I'll leave you to that.

****************

The metering contract was a poor deal for the tax payer. It was a questionable deal currently under investigation.
The metering of household water was, IMO, a prelude to privatisation.
This current idea if passed will likely lead to a private contractor being brought in.
In short, if they can't make private profit from it, for a pal, FG aren't interested, environment or no.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You said...



If you genuinely think all the Irish water protesters, or the majority, were lifers on the dole, I'll leave you to that.

****************

The metering contract was a poor deal for the tax payer. It was a questionable deal currently under investigation.
The metering of household water was, IMO, a prelude to privatisation.
This current idea if passed will likely lead to a private contractor being brought in.
In short, if they can't make private profit from it, for a pal, FG aren't interested, environment or no.

Bottom line Matthew, we are where we are.

Middle Ireland won’t be stiffed again..... will not happen.

Privatization is being put out as ‘the big bad dog’ of all this.

Let’s put it this way, the waste collection privitisation has proved that the taxpayer won’t be held up to ransom every year or two by people who think they can’t be sacked or can use the taxpayer to operate on their own terms .

It’s called productivity. Do what you are paid to do,bub.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Bottom line Matthew, we are where we are.

Middle Ireland won’t be stiffed again..... will not happen.

Privatization is being put out as ‘the big bad dog’ of all this.

Let’s put it this way, the waste collection privitisation has proved that the taxpayer won’t be held up to ransom every year or two by people who think they can’t be sacked or can use the taxpayer to operate on their own terms .

It’s called productivity. Do what you are paid to do,bub.

If you had an issue with taxation or government policy, would you contact Paul Murphy or 'Gubbermint'?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If you had an issue with taxation or government policy, would you contact Paul Murphy or 'Gubbermint'?

Could you flesh that out a bit Matthew, thanks .

What’s your point is what I am saying, m’kay.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Could you flesh that out a bit Matthew, thanks .

What’s your point is what I am saying, m’kay.

Gladly.

You said:

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Hmm ..so as I understand it anyone who has issues blame the Gubbermint.
...:

Do you agree we should look to Gubbermint or Paul Murphy/PBP etc? Which would you reckon makes sense when having issue with current or past government policy? Do you think there's any point in making it all about people on less than 1% in the polls?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Gladly.

You said:



Do you agree we should look to Gubbermint or Paul Murphy/PBP etc? Which would you reckon makes sense when having issue with current or past government policy? Do you think there's any point in making it all about people on less than 1% in the polls?

Making it all about people with less than 1% in the polls .. hopefully I didn’t imply that.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Making it all about people with less than 1% in the polls .. hopefully I didn’t imply that.

You implied that we shouldn't be complaining to Gubbermint about things. I was asking who else? You're the one gives political weight to minor politicians with more megaphones than supporters for having the metering shelved.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You implied that we shouldn't be complaining to Gubbermint about things. I was asking who else? You're the one gives political weight to minor politicians with more megaphones than supporters for having the metering shelved.

In fairness Matthew I cannot understand how you extrapolate that from my posts.

You have me puzzled big time there.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

In fairness Matthew I cannot understand how you extrapolate that from my posts.

You have me puzzled big time there.

Well if you don't know why you said what you said I can't translate lad.

As long as we are in agreement that gubbermint was responsible for the mess that was IW and why it had to be chopped off at the ankles, quango that it is.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Well if you don't know why you said what you said I can't translate lad.

As long as we are in agreement that gubbermint was responsible for the mess that was IW and why it had to be chopped off at the ankles, quango that it is.

Matthew we have to put things in context here.

I had a read back through the thread and I think on post 533 I said I had contacted my Govt.reps on this and another post said that those responsible should be held to account.Thats the Gubbermint and public service execs.

However.... that said, I see what you are saying now, and fully agree.

The Gubbermint made a total donkeys bollox of the thing from start to finish, and if I didn’t make it clear that I believed that , I apologise.

I also agree having read back that I shouldn’t focus on Murphy and his mob but instead the total ineptitude of the set up, implementation, planning and marketing of the project by the Gubbermint.

Total shambles and they should be held to account...

So in fairness you stuck to the point, and I now see where you are coming from and agree.




Group hug...:D

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Matthew we have to put things in context here.

I had a read back through the thread and I think on post 533 I said I had contacted my Govt.reps on this and another post said that those responsible should be held to account.Thats the Gubbermint and public service execs.

However.... that said, I see what you are saying now, and fully agree.

The Gubbermint made a total donkeys bollox of the thing from start to finish, and if I didn’t make it clear that I believed that , I apologise.

I also agree having read back that I shouldn’t focus on Murphy and his mob but instead the total ineptitude of the set up, implementation, planning and marketing of the project by the Gubbermint.

Total shambles and they should be held to account...

So in fairness you stuck to the point, and I now see where you are coming from and agree.




Group hug...:D

I'm not crying, just chopping onions for the dinner...

branie2

Red or white onions?